I N THE surgical removal of parotid tumors there are at least two cardinal principles: first, the tumor must be completely removed, and second, unnecessary injury (either temporary or permanent) to the seventh cranial nerve or its larger branches must be avoided whenever possible. Although it is well known that complete paralysis of the facial nerve is compatible with health, nevertheless, the resultant deformity of one side of the face, frequently associated with epiphora or cornea1 ulceration, is a tragic complication, both somatic and psychologic. For this reason, in his concern to avoid such injury to the seventh nerve, the surgeon who laiks sufficient knowledge of the anatomy of the parotid gland and surgical experience in this region often proceeds with undue timidity and caution. Such an inhibited approach on the part of the surgeon commonly results in an entirely inadequate operation which fails to remove the tumor completely. The frequency with which such incomplete operations are performed can be illustrated by the results of the survey of the clinical material observed. In the Head and Neck Clinic in Memorial Hospital it is found that 36 per cent of all patients admitted for the treatment of parotid tumors have had one or more previous operations for attempted removal of the growths. The complete removal of the parotid gland with sacrifice of the facial nerve is an old procedure6 and admittedly is capable of permanent control of the local disease in most cases; nevertheless, in actual practice most surgeons would be loathe to carry out such a drastic operation except where most of the gland is found to be invaded by cancer. For the majority of parotid tumors, either benign or malignant, the ideal surgical program would be one designed to remove the tumor together with a portion of the parotid gland and to spare all or whatever branches of the nerve are uninvolved by the growth. Over the past quarter century there has been a steady systematic evolution of such a conservative surgical procedure. The tendency in recent years, however, has been to advocate an extracapsular enucleation of the tumor. While this limited type of operation may be successful for the smaller encapsulated growths located in the superficial or peripheral portions of the gland, nevertheless, it seldom proves to be adequate for the larger growths. For example,’ a tumor which on clinical examination appears to be located in the superficial portions of the gland is frequently found at actual operation to extend into the deeper portions of the organ or to be infiltrating rather than encapsulated. In other words, it is difficult in many cases